John Smith

To : Electrical Control Joint Working Group Representatives

The Quadrant:MK Elder Gate Milton Keynes MK9 1EN

Our Reference JGER575a 29 May 2014

To : Electrical Control Joint Working Group Representatives Thank you for your letter dated 17 May 2014, requesting clarification on our proposal for Electrical Control Restructuring. This letter provides additional details on points raised 1: Can you clarify that the 1% is withheld pending reaching an agreement on Phase 2 and that the 5.75% in phase 1 cannot be withdrawn should we be unable to reach an agreement in phase 2. I can confirm that the 1% is withheld until agreement is reached on a new grading structure in Phase 2. If the two phase restructuring proposal is accepted, the 5.75% paid in phase 1 will not be withdrawn if agreement is not reached in Phase 2. However, we engage and expect nominated representatives to engage in the design of a new grading structure for ECOs with an open mind to change It is important to recognise that when developed, a new grading structure may look and be evaluated differently to the historic structure. 2: Can you clarify that ‘mentoring’ or more accurately, the sharing of E.C.O. knowledge and experience is only one element of the development cycle that trainee E.C.O.’s will undergo in order to acquire vocational competence. Delivery of a quality E.C.O. training package is the responsibility of suitably qualified trainers employed by Network Rail’s PD&T department and not the duty E.C.O’s. ECOs will be required to mentor and coach other ECOs. The ECO job description will be amended to include this responsibility and the skills advisor allowance removed. This mentoring and coaching is with regard to on the job and location specific training (ie passing on job and location specific knowledge) and will support not replace any formal training package for ECOs. 3: Staff side would facilitate release of a number of E.C.O’s with the prerequisite skills and experience. This has to be done by mutual agreement with the local manager, the staff concerned and their immediate colleagues and will be subject to exigencies of service, ensuring continuity of desk cover at all times. It is understood by the staff side that if we accept the phase 1 element all E.C.O’s will endeavour to make their skills and experience available to the project as required to assist with the implementation of the new SCADA system. ECOs are required to develop and carry out user acceptance testing on the new SCADA system

The development of the SCADA system and user acceptance testing will be by mutual agreement with line manager support. It will be subject to operational requirements and for business continuity desk cover must be maintained. Some ECOs may by mutual consent be taken off line to support this activity. All ECOs will be expected to fully engage with the project when requested to do so. 4: ECOs will engage in training on the new SCADA platform- more specifics on this are required. All ECOs will receive required training on the new platform (the SCADA system) and must openly engage in this training and follow the agreed training plans. Training on the SCADA platform will be delivered by appropriately qualified personnel and will accommodate varying levels of computer literacy and competence.

5: All historic claims for pensions and grade restructuring will be removed- this needs to clarify that it does not replace PTR&R red book arrangements nor any claims for re-grading of any E.C.R. under the current points scheme This excludes any current control room claims for regrading under the current system which should be dealt with locally. ECOs entitlement to PTR&R arrangements are not affected in Phase 1. In Phase 2, through engagement and agreement with nominated representatives we propose to replace the current grading structure. When a new grading structure is agreed this will amend the Conditions of Service section headed Classification of Electrical Control Room Operators and Assistant Control Room Operators. For reference this section is attached to this letter 6: Our position on the Phase 2 element is to enter into meaningful discussions not

only on a new grading structure for ROC’s but on a concept of operation for the future, maximum panel/desk sizes with regard to workloads and manning levels. Managing the transition into ROC’s and looking at the best ways of making use of new technologies for the future. This list is not exhaustive and should be agreed when we set the’ terms of reference’ for the phase 2 element of negotiations. This second phase of work when agreed will need to go through the normal ‘machinery of negotiation’ with consultation and ballots of E.C.O’s just as the first phase has. We propose to engage with your nominated representatives to develop a new grading structure for ROC ECOs. When designed through the working group, the proposed grading system will be subject to negotiation in line with our collective bargaining procedures. If agreed this grading structure will apply when ECOs transfer to Rail Operating Centres We propose to recommence Electrical Control Functional Council discussions to work together to design maximum panel/desk sizes with regard to workloads and manning levels and to determine how best to manage the transition to Rail Operating Centres. When discussions recommence we will design and agree a terms of reference. It is proposed that summary notes of both grading and working group discussions are taken, agreed and circulated to all Control Rooms. I trust this letter provides the required clarification. I trust we can work together to achieve a mutually acceptable outcome. Yours sincerely

Andy Jones Head of Operations Competence